If I'm remembering Dr. D correctly, the food nutrient values in the TypeBase have been taken from nationally accepted standards/information. The information possibly came from published sources originating from the FDA. I could be wrong, but that's what I seem to remember when Dr. D explained the food nutrient tables to develop SWAMI.
If a senior member knows different, please correct me.
The USDA Nutrient Database was the source for (nearly) all the nutritional data, to the best of my knowledge.
For me this graph shows protein 17.7 grams/100 grams = 17.7% ; fat 4 grams/100grams = 0.4% and carbohydrate grams/100grams = 0 . Now, the graph -the circle - shows : protein : 80 % ; fat 19 % and carbohydrates 0 % . I think it's a misunderstanding, somewhere ! In your reply you said "4 fat grams/ (17.7 protein grams + 4 grams protein) = 18.4%" "17.7 fat grams/ (17.7 protein grams + 4 grams protein) = 81.5%" So, 18.4 % = 81.5 % I think this graph is more important than the linear graph( graph 1, before-with the calories ) who is correct.
Thank you C_sharp; in mean time, sincerely, I don't understand your reasoning about the pie graphs, but I appreciate your collaboration and the fact you took your time to analyze them. I'm still certain there is an error, not necessarily truthlessness, maybe just an site-editor elaboration problem, but it can create a lot of confusing. Thank you !
I've seen people have a lot of different problems with understanding certain things about their diets, but I have never seen anyone yet arguing with what amounts to a sign post. I have my own USDA program on my computer that anyone can download for themselves almost anywhere in the world. That is what I use. I have never looked at the graphs, etc., on this site, and I have been on these diets for nearly thirteen years. I have the same program that Dr. D. used. Here is the page: http://www.ars.usda.gov/Services/docs.htm?docid=5720
"We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid." -- Benjamin Franklin
GT1; L (a-b-); (se); PROP-T; NN Sa Bon Nim Admin & Columnist
Location: ''eternal spring'' Cuernavaca - Mex.
I’m waiting for other pertinent answers! Thank you!
get a secretor test and depending on results, adapt your guidelines accordingly
''Just follow the book, don't look for magic fixes to get you off the hook. Do the work.'' Dr.D.'98 DNA mt/Haplo H; Y-chrom/J2(M172);ISTJ The harder you are on yourself, the easier life will be on you!
Just to reformulate for some members, here, who “still” not understand the matter and are socked and stunned about my cheek to examine and present some facts. I was concerned about 2 problems-clearly explained in my post, above- and the majority of answers were superficial, arrogant and unrelated. Thank you to C_sharp for his collaboration, concerning the pie-graphs! Returning to secretor-nonsecretor, my intention it wasn’t to reinvent the wheel(or, maybe yes ) but to understand why you have to following a secretor value if you don’t know your secretor status. I’m really sorry to said that but answers as “read the post...” or “because the majority is secretor” I think are more than irrelevant, and I’ve already give some explanations, about this, in my posts, before. If you follow your secretor values-because you don’t know your secretor status- there are a lot of chances (or bad luck-depending) if you are non-secretor to harm your system because you eat AVOID food. A lot of secretor food is “neutral” and for non- secretors are “avoid” and not the opposite. Just for the fact the secretors are 80% we can harm the non-secretors. It’s a non sense. As I told before, is the same as saying for AB type to eat O type, because O type is majority. Again, I’m not here to create revolt but to clarify some problems. Just for the “grousers” , I’m on this diet(and all my family) from 5 years ago ,( and we know our secretor status) and we respect it a lot and still on it because we are happy with. That’s why I think we have to help others to understand better, and ourselves, also. P.S.: Again for the “grousers”, every day I’m trying to improve my english and suggest you do the same , first with your native language, and after, just try to open your mind and maybe you’ll be able, one day, to understand and write another language and set aside of your arrogance and hypocrisy. Thank you !
Teacher Rh+ Lewis: a+b-, NN,Taster Sa Bon Nim Administrator
In my case.
Following a secretor diet was not ideal, but better than the diet I had before.
It was enough better that I knew that I should be following the blood type diet.
I first determined that it was better for me to follow the A nonsecretor diet rather than the A secretor diet by testing individual foods and seeing what avoids I reacted to and which I did not.
It was clear from the foods I tested that I did better with the nonsecretor ratings. So I assumed that would be the case for foods that I did not test as well.
I switched to the nonsecretor because it worked for me.
Later (more than a year), I confirmed my status with a Lewis test. I think even if it indicated I was a secretor, I would have continued to follow the nonsecretor diet since it worked so much better for me.
So, following your logic, the type AB have to follow the O blood type , because the O type represents 65% and AB 5%.
Sorry - your logic is flawed. You are confusing two totally different pieces of data. First is ABO status. O should follow O, A - A, etc...
Secretor status is different, but very few know this subtype information when starting. Since 80 to 85% of the population is Secretor, it is suggested to start following the Secretor values for your ABO type. If anyone wants to make sure that you aren't eating Non-Secretor avoids, then avoid them as well as all of the Secretor avoids... This is a personal choice.
C_sharp, that was my point. If you following the secretor status there are a lot of "avoid" food for non-secretor and not the opposite. That's why is more than logically to follow a non-secretor value if you don't know your status, because you can protect both. Anyway, I'm already tired to see that people still to hardening the neck or just not take attitude. One more time, it's possible I'm wrong, but just do some "effort" and confirm me! Or maybe, even it's not "politically correct", we have to agree that's not the ideal way to explained, but we'll re-examine this. Fortunately, there are some guys who think differently and we are not all upside down!
I'm new to all of this (getting SWAMI tested tomorrow by a certified practitioner) and I think the best thing is to follow the BTD diet and with that, literally, trust your gut. If some foods feel weird to eat, AVOID!
Phase 2 is to spend a few bucks and test your secretor status. Why not?
Third is to delve deeper and get professionally SWAMI genotyped. Again, the more you delve further, the more information unfolds and that is a good thing, right? I am learning that things that appear as contradictions are not because Dr. D's research is flawed, that's not true at all. It's because we're all individuals and have specific dietary needs different from anyone else. It's kind of cool, really!!
Becrola, I am also new here. What I have found is that this forum is filled with amazing human beings who offer their generous advice and guidance. It's heartwarming to know that such a forum exists. Your post came across as accusatory and the tone was a bit harsh. "So because of this, I assume this!! Explanations???". Woah, man...easy!! I have questions too and I have had some head scratching moments. People like ABJoe, Victoria, Henrietta and so many others were kind to share their experiences and opinions which offered valuable insight.
Stick around and see. This place is gold. These people are gold!!
Taxman, I agree with you and with your opinion to test your secretor status. I think that's the right answer. In mean time i don't agree I'm accusatory. I can't tolerate evasive and irrelevant answers, just because there are from “veterans”. As I told you before, if I'm bothering you, no problem, but I don't tolerate neither the "politically correct” attitude, which is more than a communist way!
Live Life Joyfully 42% Teacher Autumn: Harvest, success.
Location: Southern MD
First off let me say English is a difficult second language to acquire for many. Because I have 4 internationally adopted children I've seen the struggles firsthand of learning English, particularly grammar and spelling. You're doing a great job communicating with us!
I do also agree that learning your secretor status is very important, although for large families like mine following each's own blood type diet, buying secretor tests for everyone is an expense that isn't necessarily feasible, at least not all at the same time. For many reasons I won't get into I guessed I was a non-secretor and had that entered into my SWAMI for many months. However, last winter I spent Christmas money I had received to buy myself (and my husband) a secretor test, and much to my surprise I found out I was a secretor. There were foods I was eating and drinking regularly, such as lamb, sweet potato, and an occasional seltzer water. All of those foods became strict avoid when I discovered my secretor status.
You see, there are some foods non-secretors can eat/drink that secretors can't because secretors secrete their blood type antigens into their digestive tracts, thereby causing problems that non-secretors won't have.
I've also encountered the same thing with my type B sons with multiple foods. One son we know is a non-secretor and the other, who has very few health problems, is most likely a secretor. There are quite a number of foods my B non-secretor son gets to enjoy such as tomatoes, pumpkin, amaranth, and stevia that my secretor son avoids . I know there are other foods on the type O diet, such as lentils, pinto beans, and avocados that non-secretors are allowed to have that secretors shouldn't eat.
All I"m saying is that you should maybe rethink whether a person of an unknown secretor status would be better off eating like a non-secretor. I know that philosophy was not the best for me, and immediately after I got my secretor test back I was the first to admit on these forums that I was wrong and should not have assumed my secretor status. I think it was good advice to anyone that read my post.
I sincerely hope you continue on this forum because there truly are very wonderful, supportive people here.
ColeenISF-J, Non-Taster "Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world." James 1:26-27
Kimonokat , again, it's not about the veracity of the source or the data there, but the fact there is a big contradiction between the graphs and the information; just some seconds of basic calculation. I'll give you again the example: PROTEIN (17.7 GRAMS PER 100 GRAMS ) FAT (4 GRAMS PER 100 GRAMS ) CARBOHYDRATE (0 GRAMS PER 100 GRAMS ) AND THE GRAPH SHOWS : PROTEIN 80% FAT 19% per 100 grams
The pie percentages reflect calories, not weight.
4 minutes later: I read further and I see that C_Sharp has already elaborated on this and has provided a comprehensive explanation.